China’s regulatory innovation for new biomedical technologies

Nature正文已收录本站
  • CORRESPONDENCE

By

  • Siying Guo1,
  • Jun Du2 &
  • …
  • Ning Li3
  1. Yuan Fang
    1. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences–Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

  2. Siying Guo
    1. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences–Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

  3. Jun Du
    1. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences–Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

  4. Ning Li
    1. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences–Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

In July, an investigation reported that a six-year-old girl died last year after receiving an experimental brain-directed gene-editing therapy for a rare disorder in Shanghai, China (B. Borrell Science 393, 346–353; 2026). The case pre-dates China’s State Council Order No. 818, a new biomedical technologies framework that came into effect on 1 May. However, the case still highlights the challenges of biomedical regulation.

Nature 657, 312 (2026)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-026-02737-5

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

  • Personalized gene editing helped one baby: can it be rolled out widely?

  • New rules spur cell and gene therapy trials in China

  • A society-wide conversation is needed about germline genome editing

  • See more letters to the editor

Subjects

Latest on:

  • Gene therapy
  • Policy
  • Ethics
  • Epigenetic editing makes its mark

    Technology Feature

  • Non-genotoxic transplantation and in vivo selection through epitope editing

    Article

  • From cloning to gene-editing: the enduring legacy of Dolly the sheep

    Editorial

  • The global plastics treaty must account for conflict-driven energy insecurity

    Correspondence

  • Europe should adapt, not copy, China’s practical PhD

    Correspondence

  • Why are rich people so pessimistic? What the numbers say

    Comment

  • Who is responsible when AI helps to write science?

    Comment

  • Assessing students in the AI era

    Correspondence

  • How tech-enhanced sleep could improve rest but erode privacy

    Comment